Newspapers for schools

Here’s an early Christmas present for you. I’ve re-signed us onto Newspapers for Schools, which gives you:

  • Access to over 140 UK newspapers
  • One-stop-shop for researching leading UK national and regional newspapers.
  • Over 35 million articles
  • 2006 up to present day
  • Search by keyword or author

Really useful for carrying out research for any topic in the news, building a bibliography or just staying informed!

I will email the login details, if you need them resent, just email me.

Was it Facebook ‘wot won it’? – BBC News

Here’s an article I just read closely related to my post yesterday: Is the media responsible for Trump’s victory? (In a way you may not expect)

Is broadcast and print media not as influencial as it thinks it is?

Facebook played a large role in the US election, but Mark Zuckerberg is not engaging with claims that it helped Donald Trump win.

See below for the full article:

Source: Was it Facebook ‘wot won it’? – BBC News

Is the media responsible for Trump’s victory? (In a way you may not expect)

usa-election.jpg

I was listening to LBC (http://www.lbc.co.uk, 97.3fm) during the commute today (More than expected as the journey in took an hour and a half, but I digress).  It’s a talk radio station, which I felt was probably worth a listen today, due to the news from the other side of the Atlantic. You should give it a go.

There was a particularly interesting conversation on the way home, where a caller (Named Sam in case you were wondering), suggested the involvement US media institutions had in the coverage and representation of both (President-elect) Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton. The caller and the host agreed that all-but-one major TV networks (CNN, ABC, MSNBC, NBC), showed clear support to Democratic candidate Clinton (The exception being Fox News).

“Yeah, so she should have won?” I hear you cry.

But consider the alternative possibility; what if all that positive coverage from the majority of institutions for Clinton actually hid the fact that the American people didn’t actually want to vote for her? What if they (and we over here in the UK), thought it would – of course – go to Clinton as she was getting all the positive representation, but in the process actually missed out on hearing from the audience?

In case you’re wondering how the states voted:

usa-election-mapv35.jpg

A reminder perhaps in the shift in power from institutions to audiences?

What do you think? Agree or disagree?

 

Sam Allardyce loses job as England manager after Telegraph investigation

Sam Allardyce has lost his job as England manager this evening after an investigation by The Daily Telegraph revealed he used his position to negotiate a £400,000 deal and give advice to businessmen on how to get around Football Association rules on player transfers.

Source: Sam Allardyce loses job as England manager after Telegraph investigation – live: Gareth Southgate to take charge for next four matches

#bigsham

Today’s Evening Standard

CsPpFdtWEAANir5.jpg

Picked up the Evening Standard on the way home this evening (I was on a course ok?)

Alternative caption: This is a photo of two heads of state.🙄

What are your opinions of this?

  • Is there too much emphasis on the gender of these two politicians?
  • Does what they are wearing really matter?
  • Do the linguistic codes connote anything? A ‘First Lady’ is the traditional title for the wife of a head of state, e.g. Michelle Obama.
  • How does Hilary Clinton fit into all this? (No she’s not quite president, but when the opponent is Donald Trump…)

This is the critical awareness I would expect of an A-Level Media Studies student. Get out there and get critical!

 

Newspaper headlines: Air crash horror and ‘free speech’ fury – BBC News

Understandably, most front pages cover the EgyptAir plane crash, but there are some interesting things that you could discuss in an analysis.

Credit to @1stbarnard for discovering this.

The Metro‘s coverage is arguably the most diplomatic, but note the emphasis on the fact that a British citizen is among the victims. The suggestion that a terrorist attack was the cause is in the subhead.

The Times, (The Sun in a suit), chooses to illustrate the tragic event.

The Daily Mail chooses to focus on it’s usual anti-immigration rhetoric. Shocker.

Other notable covers, include the horrible linguistic codes used by The Daily Star to explain the crash and The Sun‘s crude coverage of a celebrity gagging order.

Follow the link below for further analysis.

What do you make of this?

Source: Newspaper headlines: Air crash horror and ‘free speech’ fury – BBC News